Organizational Change, Organizational Culture and Mission Accomplishment

Chapter One: Determine aspects of organizational change that influences mission accomplishment.

In the contemporary society, organizational change is a necessity in coping and retaining existence within the rapidly evolving operation sector. Based on the rapid changes that are occurring in the globalized economy organizational change occurs consistently which is either external or internal (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 2017). Organizational change is accounted as an essential operation for the perspective of the corporation in reference to success, for improved consumer satisfaction as while as in the creation of competitive edges while eliminating the activities that fail to add any form of value to the operation of the company. Organizational change is not an easy thing to achieve on the ground that resistance is bound to arise in particular where the thoughts and freedom of the followers are suppressed which results in high resistance which in turn affects performance and motivation in accomplishing the given roles (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 2017). Organizational change concept generally entails to the wider changes that incorporate change in regard to mission, operations restructuring, collaboration, and mergers.

Organizational change is an essential issue for corporations which affects the accomplishments of missions. This is actually the procedure via which a corporation optimizes productivity while it works towards the attainment of an ideal base (Cooperrider & Srivastva, 2017). The procedure occurs as a response to the ever evolving surrounding, a major response to the existing current crisis scenario. The success of organizational change is not just a procedure of adjustment but it also necessitates adequate capabilities management. The fundamental aspects that need to be managed while controlling change includes leadership, organizational structure, engagement and communication, resources and internalization. The primary aspects of organizational change that influence the accomplishment of organizational mission mainly include resources, leadership, communication, organizational structure or Hierarchy structures and goals (Cummings & Worley, 2009).

The successful mission accomplishment in organizational change is particularly low. In large proportion, the issue arises not based on the utilized procedure but those that are involved.  Leadership plays a crucial role in driving the achievement of missions in the organizational change procedure (Cummings & Worley, 2009). Leaders are required to act as the integral character in the management of change within the respective organizations. In that, they should create followers while accounting for the effects that the respective change holds for everyone. In the contemporary organizations  the organizational surrounding changes constantly or in regular basis and given that the employees have an opinion in regard to the operations disagreements are bound to rise and they fail to work harmoniously via the required process and in this occurrence then leaders are required to offer some sort of guidance (Cummings & Worley, 2009).

Followers, particularly in the military organizations, necessitates supportive leadership in deciding the necessary efforts that they should apply in supporting a change initiative (Dievernich, Tokarski & Gong, 2014). The achievement of successful change necessitates the justification of the negative responses of these followers which result in reduced loyalty and obligation to the achievement of the set mission. The effect that leaders hold on organizational change and the respective followers is mainly influenced by the roles that are fulfilled by individuals in the delivery of the corporation’s objectives. Even though the state and the number of the given roles evolve, the organizational roles remain integral to the delivery of the organizational objectives (Dievernich, Tokarski & Gong, 2014). Team players normally feel that when the organization is experiencing high change frequency this becomes the normal standard which causes it to be perceived as unpredictable and unavoidable.  This holds a substantial effect on the responsibilities played by individuals at the work organization and on those that perform the respective roles.

The capability of people to accept and embrace change is partially related to the manner in which the change is managed. The championship of change needs to be conducted by leaders who occupy the positions of the organization’s authority. It is the leader’s responsibility to possess the necessary capabilities, skills as well as behavior and also ensure that all their followers acquire the understanding and skills that are appropriate to ensure lasting and successful change (Dievernich, Tokarski & Gong, 2014). It is the leadership behaviors and skills rather than the style of leadership that influences the responses of the followers towards organizational change which impacts the success of the implemented change.  There are several skills and behaviors that are necessary for ensuring positive effects on those that follow which leads to the achievement of successful and maintainable change. These incorporate the involvement of employees, communication, reliable evaluations, supportive management, the utilization of flexible leadership, consultation and the development of strong organizational values and direction corporate management developments (Dievernich, Tokarski & Gong, 2014). There are, however, very few leaders that own all these requirements that are necessary for achieving positive results which imply that leadership development is a necessity to ensuring successful organizational change.

Staffs consultations on change strategies implementations work to ensure that relevance, change efficiency and commitment are achieved by the involved leaders in the development of an authoritative set of organizational values. These values provide the corporation with an objective that motivates the achievement of operations (Driskill & Brenton, 2011). In other words, corporate values are described as the employee’s characteristics of the entire corporation that incorporates both actions as well as words. Based on research it is rather apparent that leaders must live by the value they propose rather than merely enforcing them given that this failure might lead to the reduction of staff’s commitment. Leadership style is an additional leadership aspect that influences the achievement of a given mission. Different situations necessitate differing styles of leadership given that change is mainly efficient when the involved leaders activate amid consultative and directive intimidating approaches (Driskill & Brenton, 2011). Leaders are supposed to instill future plans, confidence, assist managers in becoming the facilitators for change and the creation of a mutual objective.

Achieving successful organizational change is a possible operation. Procedural equality, support management, well organized and implemented change programs can all lead to effectiveness (Driskill & Brenton, 2011). The military organizations are operating in a progressively dynamic and complex surrounding. This issue is often stated to be the justifications to why corporations undergo through differing transformations in the quest of retaining their relevance in the exposure of probable or existing threats. The increasing changes are deemed to be the critical organizational success driver as well as a fundamental force in the creation of a competitive advantage. Organizational change requires participative rather than authoritative change. In that change based on description necessitates the development of fresh approaches. Thus administrative leaders by the merits impact, are in the fit positions in playing this responsibility of increasing achievement (Driskill & Brenton, 2011). In addition, individuals frequently need their leaders to taking responsibility for their organizational change. In fact, there is a present empirical evidence that demonstrates leader’s role within the change procedure which has a significant implication on the change efforts success.

During the organizational change, there are a number of issues that leaders are necessitated to manage which can best be classified as technical, individuals and emotional aspects.  For most leaders, they tend to place their efforts mainly on the technical or contributory aspects in facilitating successful change (Finch, 2011). This entails having in place proper structures, procedures, rewards, arrangements as well as technologies. These issues can typically be handled via technical as well as rational strategy. Handling technical aspects merely is not adequate as this should be complemented by the consideration of the emotional and people change aspects. Actuality, the reality of most military corporations demonstrates that the individual aspect is given fewer thoughts and considerations. However, this corporation is comprised of individuals and therefore the consideration of this populace should lead the non-human aspects of the corporation while advocating for any kind of change. Dissimilar leaders own diverse standards and beliefs with respect to change, management and entity’s in general (Finch, 2011). This hints to them embracing diverse administration roles in relative to the procedural, persons and the expressive change aspects.

Leaders act as shapers to the organizational change and therefore determines the success of the implemented mission. Within the conventional leadership and management standards, it is also perceived that the leader is responsible for the overall control of the corporation so that all the things can work based on the developed plan without any kind of unneeded outcomes (Finch, 2011). In addition, this assumption that leaders hold the actual capability of full control results in the thought that change can be predicted and thus leaders have the capability of choosing how the transformation effort turns out (Finch, 2011). However, in the contemporary patterns leadership plays the shaper role where leadership is responsible for controlling the things that should be accomplished, sets the direction for the rest to follow thus expecting that others should follow this lead. Leaders are mainly supposed to be shaping the advocated change in the quest of achieving the mission. In order for the leadership to be successful, a detailed plan should be developed. For a leader is expected to understand the moral and the necessary operations for the corporation and individuals are bound to embrace this changes when provided with adequate information (Finch, 2011). Therefore, individual’s resistance in making the respective changes can be deemed as the necessity for strong leadership in regard to more training and guidance.

Participative rather than authoritarian leadership encourages individuals to engage more towards higher performance and collaborative operations. The participative roles see to change individual’s perceptions and responses towards the required change. Leadership plays a guiding responsibility which influences the followers even higher (Goksoy, 2016). Particularly in the attempt to shape behaviors and responses, change leadership can best be paired with pushing for the leadership agenda change as well as the capability to overcome resistive reactions from individual’s in the quest of making them develop different perceptions that are accompanied by positive reactions. The individuals under leadership are accounted to be the recipients of organizational change. Based on research it has been established that the shaper responsibility in highly effective in regard to organizational change efficiency. Moreover, when leaders attempt to offer shape to the different changes this might result in increased personal harm which reduces motivation, prevents change efficiency as well as growth. Based on the fact that organizational change is a vibrant, complex, muddled and can never be utilized in determining the general outcomes of operations it is rather agreeable to the empirical evidence which demonstrates that leader centered styles and behaviors are linked with fewer changes success (Goksoy, 2016).

Leaders are the enablers of change. The efforts focus in reference to change should be based more on accomplishing change generation with individuals rather than attempting to change the individuals (Goksoy, 2016). This is an optional pattern where leadership plays the enabling role in organizational change thus creating the conditions that promote and energizes individuals to contribute to the growth and the success of the organizational change procedures. This kind of leadership offers technical change framework and also seeks to encourage individual’s involvement which facilitates the generation of sense which generates about emotional alignment (Goksoy, 2016). In such surrounding, this creates the possibility for leaders in influencing the development and direction of the intended change which is accomplished by focusing on the major issues that individual’s faces (Goksoy, 2016).

Specifically, it is mainly asserted on the significance of leadership change in facilitating the relationship and identity formation in the organization. This is because the sense making procedures are centered on individuals change (Hornstein, 2015). This can be accomplished by different leaders based on several approaches such as role playing the needed behaviors, values communication, organizational purpose, building stronger relations and effective communication of purpose and values of the organization. The surrounding individuals offer individuals with the opportunity of experiencing the conflict and uncertainties in change procedures through which meanings are generated by establishing clarity. Organizational change should best be aligned with the set mission of the organizations in determining the most potent strategies for creating efficiency. On the other hand, organizational structure can best be described as how teams and individual’s work within the organization is coordinated (Hornstein, 2015). In the accomplishment of the firm’s purposes and aims, there is a prerequisite to organize as well as regulate operations. The construction is a firm’s most dear mechanism that is indispensable to the success of organization. An organization can best operate within a set of different structures with each of them owning differentiated benefits and disadvantages (Hornstein, 2015).

Most military organizations operate under a centralized structure. Centralization mainly refers to the extent to which the authority of making decisions is centered at higher organizational levels. In these centralized organizations, most decisions are designed at the superior hierarchy level (Lewis, 2011). On the other hand, the decentralized organization's decisions and conflicts are in particular resolved at the low level by those that are closely linked to the issue on hand. Followers of the decentralized system are more committed, productive as well as comfortable in fulfilling their responsibilities contrary to the centralized systems. In that, the decentralized systems offer more authority to the followers at the low level which leads to the creation of an empowerment sense. In this context, decisions can be developed more rapidly and these individuals believe that the decentralized corporations offer increased procedural fairness levels to all the involved followers (Hornstein, 2015). The military organizations are more focused on centralized systems where the responsibility of making decisions is given to the superior supervisors and managers thus placing increased demands on the judgment of individual’s capabilities.

Based on research it is apparent that the decentralized system results in decision-making inefficiencies. However, this system within the military organizations has its own benefits. In that most of the followers are highly comfortable in situations where the instructions and decisions and confidently made by the managers which work to ensure that there is accountability (Lewis, 2011). In addition, efficient operations can be generated in instances where the organization works in a stable setting. In addition, most organizations can suffer mainly from high decentralization. For instance, it is supposed that particular Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) is exposed to numeral problems given that all its organizations and constructions are grounded on the supposition that the examination of misconduct should occur afterward the manifestation of crime (Lewis, 2011). Over the passing of time, the assumption developed the situation where all the unit become decentralized thus requiring all the field’s agents to make determinations of the pursuance of investigations. On the other hand, based on the changes of crime’s nature in the contemporary society, the FBI are necessitated to acquire reliable intelligence information prior to the occurrence of crime which therefore necessitates a more centralized strategy for making decisions as well as in acquiring growth (Lewis, 2011). 

The creation of a balance amid a decentralized and a centralized system creates difficulties for most military organizations and thus formalization is a necessity. Formalization refers to the degree to which the policies, procedures, job descriptions, and regulations are authored and articulated explicitly (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). The military organizations are amongst the leading corporations with formalized structures in which there are numerous rules so that the followers are given little autonomy in making decisions in regard to case basis. The main benefit of formalization is that the behavior of the followers is accounted as predictable and whenever an issue arises it is well known to the employee’s that they should consult the procedural guidelines for assistance. In this context, employees normally respond to these issues in similar strategies across the organization which results in behavioral consistency. While formalization adequately lowers vagueness and provides a form of guidance to the followers it does not operate without disadvantages which impact the capability to achieve the stated mission. Increased degree of formalization might result in lower innovativeness given that employees because used to the mode of behaving in specific ways. Factually, strategic decisions development in organizations like these only happens in the presence of crisis (Lewis, 2011).

The military sector is particularly vulnerable to issues that are linked with high formalization levels. In other times followers who are involved in listening to the issues of the public may necessitate taking the required actions but the specific answers might not be accurately highlighted within the procedural guidelines of the organization (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). For instance, while most of the military organizations focuses much efforts in encouraging followers to handle any raised complaint by the public, in most of these organizations followers within the low levels hold limited authority in resolving the presented issues and are thus inhibited by rigorous instructions that highlights just a limited options of the satisfactory forms of responses (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). An additional significant element of the organization’s structure lies in the number of hierarchy levels. The tall structures incorporate several management layers between the low-level employees and the superior ones and on the other hand, the flat structures are made of just a few levels. In the hierarchy structures that are taller there are just a few employees who report directly to the manager and this leads to increased opportunities for the management to monitor as well as regulate operations (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). Contrarily the flat structures incorporate more followers reporting to all the managers.

It is designated by research that smooth hierarchy heights offer augmented ranks of gratification to the flowers as well as high self- actualization degree. In simultaneous nature, there are some difficulties that are linked to flat structures (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). Based on findings when the management is involved in the supervision of more staffs which is bound to take place within the flat structures the followers are bound to experience high role ambiguity rate. The complexity that arises from the uncertainty of the job’s expectation. This is specifically the disadvantage for the staffs that necessitates closer directives from those in charge. More so, in a structure that is less tall opportunities for advancing are limited given that there are very few managing levels (Lim, Wang, & Oo, 2016). Lastly, when employees who are to report to the more flat systems are at more advanced positions of satisfying high needs like actualization, the higher divisional hierarchy offers even greater opportunities for the satisfaction of the employee's security necessities.

The structures of military organizations similar to the business ones differ in reference to hierarchy and departmentalization which are classified as either divisional or functional.  In reality, most of them are structured on the basis of an incorporation of divisional or functional categories (Mattiske, 2011). Military organizations mainly focus on the divisional departmentalization structure. This is because the organizations, unlike the consumer based ones, do not have a number of products range rather they are focused on offering differentiated services. Given that the military does not mainly operate in stable surrounding the functional structure tends to be ineffective. This is because the functional structures are highly operative in surroundings that are steady which are linked to gentler fluctuations. In this context, the military organizations are mainly required to adapt to the changing demands with the occurrence of crime events particularly in the modern setting (Mattiske, 2011). The military organizations in particular additionally follow the mechanistic structures which have a close resemblance to bureaucratic systems. The systems are an organizational structure that is associated with high formalized and centralized systems of control. In this context, communication tends to adhere to the formal models while employees operate under specific job descriptions describing their duties and roles. Mechanistic organizations are firms that are uncompromising and generally fights the manifestation of change which makes them incompatible for fast replies and revolution. The structures discourage any form of a personal initiative as well as program actions (Mattiske, 2011). The mechanistic constructions compel the entity’s self-actualization and independence which is bound to result in lesser inherent enthusiasm rates.  

However, despite these disadvantages of the mechanistic structure that is utilized by most military organizations they are linked to several advantages when utilized in a surrounding that is characterized by more stability. The main benefit is that this structure normally results in efficiency (Mattiske, 2011). Thus, in the corporations that attempt to maximize the operative efficiency while lowering their operative costs the best structure is the mechanistic one. For instance, the military organization is popular for the utilization of bureaucratic structure in which the followers are highly familiar with the concise and clear communication lines that have specified job descriptions (Mattiske, 2011). This structure offers so many advantages for the organizations given that it facilitates in the generation of uniform outcomes generally in the involvement of less cost (Mattiske, 2011).

It is against the nature of individuals to offer positive reactions to different changes given that changes take individuals out of the comfort centers. The most obvious reaction is resistance. This can best be resolved by effective communication formulation (Miller, 2014). Major changes within all the organizations and particularly the military ones can be categorized as one of the most complex issues that an organization can be subjected to. Preparation and constant communication are essential in ensuring that the followers are fully aware of these changes and are in support of these changes (Miller, 2014). Communication is an essential organizational change element and therefore it should highlight the different ways through which the organization is bound to listen and engage with the followers throughout the change process. Effective communication within the process helps in the prevention of resistance to the proposed changes, increase the follower’s preparedness to these changes (Miller, 2014).

Change readiness can best be described as the mental precursor to the behaviors that are related to support or even resistance based on the change efforts. The efficiency of organizational change will mainly be demonstrated in low resistance levels to the proposed changes or in increased change readiness levels by those that are involved (Miller, 2014). Communication in the organizational change process is associated with two major goals. To begin with, communication normally plays an integral role in offering information to employees in regard to their assigned tasks as well as in regard to policies and additional issues within the organization. In addition, communication is mainly intended in informing all the members of the organization in reference to change as well as how the changes will impact their work (Miller, 2014). These normally impacts the change readiness which works to ensure that resistance is reduced and that the members are willing to embrace the different changes set.

The provision of information in regard to what is anticipated of every member, the changing policy as well as some other related matters helps in creating familiarity with the issues. This information should be derived from the management to ensure that accuracy and dependability issues do not arise (Miller, 2014). The message should, in particular, be addressing the rationale behind the proposed changes and how the changes account for their needs as well as those of the organization (Miller, 2014). In addition, the communication should also address any worry that exists amid the involved parties by offering relevant justifications for the changes. Constant communication creates a sense of community within the organization where every individual is fully willing to participate in the respective activities. Teamwork and commitment to awards the goals of the organization are particularly needed in the building of trust, its management as well as the identification of the organization which in turn creates a positive impact on the follower’s readiness to these changes. Inadequate communication creates high uncertainty levels which are linked to job security, the anticipated outcomes, procedures, objectives as well as the general implications of the implementation of these changes (Miller, 2014). High uncertainty levels affect the general changes readiness thus lowering both job motivation as well as satisfaction.

For successful changed implementation having strategic, reliable, feasible and accurate goals is essential (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins, 2012). The success and the reliability of these goals particularly depend on communication which is prime and one of the most dynamic organizational change parameters given that it incorporates the distribution of goals, ideas as well as feelings of individuals within the organization through the use of different mediums. Communication of strategic goals in a justified and reliable manner remains to be one of the toughest challenges for which organizations are faced with in the whole process of implementing change while sustaining and improving the organizational culture (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins, 2012). The set goals should not only be fulfilling to the organization but should also address the concerns and the needs of members in general.

The goals that are being communicated should be clear and presented in a vivid manner. These goals and the associated message should demonstrate both authenticities as well as genuine. This allows the recipient to focus on attentive listening and inquire for clarifications based on their concerns. In addition, goals are essential and effective when communicated in an effective manner which can lead to efficiency (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins, 2012). In that, the recipients can utilize the clarifications in sharing their responses based on self-analysis of the content which plays part in preparedness. In addition, the goals and the communication channels should be applicable to the situations of both the receivers and those that designed and sent this message. It is worth noting that the goals should be structured in a manner that they connect appropriately with the ideas, opinions, and beliefs of the target populace so that acceptance can be acquired. In any organization and particularly the military ones, the organizational change particularly affects the members and it is the same populace that is supposed to extend its support in ensuring that the intended changed is achieved (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins, 2012). Thus, with no motivation and engagement of these members as the primary stakeholders, it is not possible to anticipate for the mission’s success from the change initiative given that it is them whose welfares are either affected negatively or desirable on the ground of the change initiative.

The incorporation of the individuals as part of the organizational resources is essential to the achievement of a positive result from the entire procedure. the engagement of the populace, their commitment as well as acceptance are essential things given that they work to influence the capability of the organization in achieving its change mission (Myers, Hulks & Wiggins, 2012). For this rationale it is important to ensure that the populace is informed completely in regard to the objectives or the intention of these changes and an opportunity of proposing their own thought through the procedure should not be denied. Based on research it has been established that the implementation of change in a transparent and consultative approach leads to effective implications to the entire change process. In this context, this kind of communication does not necessarily seek to convey the intended goals but also to communicate In regard to the resources that are present for the implementation (Promes, 2016). Communication offers a kind of plan on how the resources are to be utilized which not only helps in the generation of familiarity but also in the creation of the necessary support that is necessary for achieving the program’s efficiency.

The creation and continuance of change are mainly about individuals and the manner in which they work in creating the required change. It is undoubted that human resource holds a fundamental role in the creation of efficiency (Promes, 2016). In reference to the adequacy and effectiveness of human resource can be of assistance in facilitating and hindering the occurrence of change. With inadequate resources, this means that the organizational change is to be implemented under the presence of limited capability and therefore efficiency will not be acquired. In this context, the intangible, tangible and human resources should be appropriate in facilitating the achievement of the mission (Promes, 2016). Resource planning should, therefore, be carried out. This can best be described as the procedure through which the existing and the future's needs within the resources and identified and described in the quest of designing how the desired goals are to be achieved. The efficiency of any project normally depends upon the availability and the distribution of resources. Within the military organizations, all the members should be given equal or adequate resources that are a necessity in motivating and supporting their operations. The organizational followers are bound to acquire a sense of motivation and satisfaction. With the presence of clear visions as well as objectives the envisioned change might not be acquired successfully (Promes, 2016). This implies that the success is mainly facilitated by having the right resources as well as conditions, particularly which is mainly objected in offering support to the process of enhancing change. Resources offer an indication of efficiency in that they create a more favorable surrounding that not only impacts the members but also create a sense of willingness in being participative and collaborative in supporting the mission of the organization (Promes, 2016).

Chapter Two: Outline Elements of Organizational Culture That Are Linked To Organizational Change

As individuals work together to accomplishing a set of mission, different groups develop to form the stability of the organization. As the different goals held by corporations begin to be more specified and long run organizations begin to identify the need of being institutionalized and formalized (Bissell & Dolan, 2011). Organizations normally tend to adopt a differentiated life that is comprised of held values, practices and beliefs in creating a differentiation from all the other organizations that operate in the same sector and this often affects the achievement of the organization’s mission by either creating either success or even failure. In the beginning of the 1980s researchers in the management field began to their attempt to offering a rather reliable description of the specific cultural systems which are regarded as the organizational culture which tends to impact the general capability of organizational change (Bissell & Dolan, 2011). The main elements of the organizational culture that are associated with organizational change are values, Rite and Rituals, Networks, Norms, and Climate.

Organizational culture can best be described as a set of shared assumptions, norms, values, assumptions as well as the belief that offers guidance to all the members of the organization. Organizational culture in the military sector tends to acquire shaping by the values of the founders, the surrounding of the organization and the operating industry (Andriopoulos & Dawson, 2008). Military organizations are necessitated to adapt to the increasingly rapid changes in the industry. The military sector is one that is comprised of shared practices and norms by almost all the involved organizations based on the demand for their services. Similarly to all the other large organizations the hold dominant cultures that are shared by only such authoritarian kind of organizations and the sub cultures are denoted by individual groups who possess differentiated beliefs and standards that might work in consistency with the dominating culture. The strong cultures within these organizations are the ones that the core standards of the controlling culture are strongly held by most of the members of these organizations.  Having a strong organizational culture tends to raise consistency while lowering the turnover rate (Andriopoulos & Dawson, 2008). However, it should be noted that strong cultures can as well be less equipped in adapting to organizational change which might, in turn, generate barriers to the creation of diversity and this might incorporate barriers to the successful implementation of projects and organizational development.

There are a number of strategies that can be utilized within the military organizations that tend to maintain the lively nature of culture thus facilitating in measuring the fitness of this culture amid the staffs and the organization (Burton & Obel, 2004). Most of the human resource operations like training, selection, development, and appraisal based on performance are some of the aspects that strengthen the organization’s culture. On the other hand organizational beliefs normally influences the working standards, practices of communication and the perception in that environment. Most organizations utilize a procedure that is referred to as socialization in adopting fresh strategies for overcoming the resistance that might be associated with proposed changes. The failure of the members to adopt positively are bound to experience increased performance pressure which might, in turn, affect their commitment. The employees are bound to engage in more conflicts while others become isolated or even opt to leave and get into another organization which has a culture in which they fit (Burton & Obel, 2004). Contrarily, for the members who understand and fit within the values of the organization hold more improved basis for creating more reasonable options that match with the goals of the organization.

In the contemporary society, most military organizations compete via the use of innovation as the strategic change that seeks to acquire effectiveness. When most of the members comprehend and offer support to the expectations of these organizations, this implies that less time is wasted in offering justification, directing and the building of a favorable image before attempting to adopt innovativeness (Burton & Obel, 2004). Moreover, it is apparent that the level of errors occurrence tends to be less in most of the cases. For those that are well informed and engaged within the fitting culture, they tend to acquire satisfaction in their respective roles. This is because they are accounted as part of the change and their contribution is usually beyond performance. Therefore, an effective culture fits amid the members and the organization that accounts to the member’s retention, profit generalization, and productivity (Burton & Obel, 2004). In this context, the culture of any organization can best influence the success of the organizational change by incorporating diversity which entails accounting for the needs and the preferences of all the members as a form of motivation and in the creation of job satisfaction.

Organizations usually transfer cultural value mainly by the use of organizational mission statements or in lesser approach via the use of corporate slogans and advertisement focus (Burton & Obel, 2004). However, for the military organizations, the focus lies mainly on the general capability to fulfill the set mission which is highly supported by corporate slogans which tend to focus more on the organization's focus and central purposes which are to serve the larger public. Organizational leaders and the relevant managers also demonstrate the values of the organization based on what they assert and practice, their rewarding and motivation strategies (Burton & Obel, 2004). Other cultural elements normally appear implicitly in regard to symbolic conduct such as protocols and the utilization of resources which respect some of the areas where the standards of the organizations develop from. Culture is effective in the regulation of social norms as well as operative norms.

Military organizations are associated with some of the firmest rites and rituals which have been existence for long. For instance, the orientation of new members that are literally offered by the military organizations shows the selected cultural aspects as promoted and attributed to the management (Cameron & Green, 2012). Some of the cultural aspects can be indigestible at the beginning given that the members are pressured to fit. It is rather unfortunate that organizational culture is in most cases not communicated and the members are forced to learn via inquiries and observation.  This forces the employees to continuously observe the changes within the operating rules which affect the mission accomplishment given that members are in different levels of understanding (Cameron & Green, 2012).

In addition, these organizations also inform in regard to procedures and values via the use of displayed objects. Organizations create rituals and rites that are equivalent to the conventional activities within the ethnic culture. While some organizations tend to assert on award appraisal others normally tend to emphasize more on explicit affiliation and appreciation conduct (Cameron & Green, 2012). The military organizations mainly focus on increased supervision where the supervisors normally utilize most of their time praising and criticizing operations. Direct communication in such a surrounding is low given that the operations are more grounded on the structured guidelines. Despite the fact that all the military organizations own both informal and formal communication levels, the organization’s culture often impacts the dependability, influence, and reliability of informal communication (Cameron & Green, 2012). The formal communication is saturated while the informal networks are scarce which tends to discourage team working and work integration. Based on the cultural importance it is essential for leaders to try and establish and in most times promote the use of informal networks in creating more connections.

The culture of an organization is made of steady features that are grounded on values that are rooted deeply that are strengthened by most of the organizational norms. This culture can be transformed and the transformations are likely to occur with the presence of a dramatic crisis. Having a weak organizational culture means that the likelihood of achieving efficiency is close to zero (Cameron & Green, 2012). In that efficiency is driven by the organization’s climate which should be favorable for every member in facilitating their contribution. An authoritative organizational culture is usually linked with the strategic context of any organization which has the capability to embrace environmental transformations in enhancing the long run performance of the organization. Having a strong culture holds significant implications on the general behaviors of an individual in relation to their roles.  In a general sense, an authoritative organizational culture creates the organizational identity, a uniqueness sense as well as a connection sense for everyone that is within the given surrounding (Cameron & Green, 2012). The culture of an organization is fundamental because it is designed to facilitate the coping with the working surrounding. With the rapid changes that are occurring leaders are subjected to dynamic issues while they try to acquire achievements. Therefore success can best be acquired by aligning the culture with the general needs of the corporation. It is contended by most researchers that the issues that are currently faced by the military organization’s leaders are mainly rooted by the incapability to evaluate, design and communicate the norms of these cultures (Cameron & Green, 2012). It is apparent that trying to implement strategic changes that lead to the generation of efficiency is likely to fail if the changes are not consistent with the culture of the respective organizations.

Cultural values are bound to affect the implementation of strategic change by creating resistance if they fail to fit with the existing standards.  Values normally determine and in high extent influences individual’s behaviors, but the values cannot be observed directly when equated to behaviors (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). However, the values of an organization are categorized in two kinds which are operational and the specified values. The specified values are the ones communicated by the corporation in regard to what is expected and the accepted norms in the organizations. However, the operational ones are those that individuals tend to adopt in the operation that is acquired from the given specification. These values are accepted and thus cannot be differentiated from the specified one (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Most individuals and particularly in the military organizations attribute their practices to the specified values.

The existing beliefs, as well as assumptions in an organization, are acquired from the well-developed values. However, they only exist until individuals begin to ignore their presence which leads to them being abandoned without being aware (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Based on this descriptions it is evident that individuals might be unaware of these beliefs or even incapable of articulating the assumptions that create their most grounded culture. An organization can be comprised of differentiated cultures and thus the cultural unit within must be understood in acquiring efficiency (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). The culture of an organization is developed, sustained and changed by the members. The culture of the organization is additional generated and maintained by the respective leadership. In that, the leaders are particularly required to generate the dominating ideologies the articulation of the ruling values as well as make a specification of the respective standards. Organizational values usually demonstrate and communicate preferences in regard to certain conducts that determines the general outcomes.  Organizational standards demonstrate the expected practices and conduct from all those that are involved. This is the accepted modes culturally in the pursuing of the set organizational goals. In addition, leaders are involved in the setting of parameters for the formalized communication which helps in creating the interaction of the organizational guidelines (Cameron & Quinn, 2011). Once the values and the norms of the organization are transmitted throughout the organization this helps in creating efficiency through the designed parameters.

Rites as one of the major organizational culture’s aspects mainly clarify the complex and the designed operations sets that play part in the consolidation of different kinds of culturally based languages which are achieved via social integration (Ramanathan, 2009). In this context, this is the norms that dictate the extent to which individuals should participate.  Rites are engraved within the culture of the organization as the beliefs in regard to operations. On the other hand, ritually refers to the detailed and consistent techniques options as well as behaviors that regulate any form of curiosity or emotional instability by occasionally generates practical implications that possess technical significance (Ramanathan, 2009). Rituals are utilized in regulating individual’s behaviors which work to ensure that their operations are within the accepted norm that seeks to promote rather than create any kind of destruction for the corporation. Values are the goals, ideologies as well as the concepts that are shared by the organization.  This is mainly grounded within the mission statement which creates a form of direction in regard to where the corporation heads and what it seeks to do in order to ensure that the set mission is achieved (Ramanathan, 2009).

Rituals and rites are the activities, operations and the general ceremonials that strengthen the values, objectives and the beliefs of the organization. A communication network as an essential need v in acquiring efficiency normally affects the capability of achieving efficiency. In that, all the members need to understand what is contained in the general procedures and beliefs so that they can adhere to what they necessitate (Ramanathan, 2009). Cultural aspects are mainly delivered via informal communication which mainly depends on the social and the operative content which serves as a guide for the members. For instance, this involves a social networking procedure in regard to the authority chain in the organization. Norms, on the other hand, refers to the standards or the ways through which things are accomplished in the organization (Ramanathan, 2009). These are the tasks, guidelines as well as the organization’s standards. The military organizations in particular work under the norm of dress codes which vary in regard to the job level as well as qualifications. Lastly, climate refers to the supportiveness surrounding that is felt by the members of the organization (Ramanathan, 2009). This refers for instance to the level of satisfaction and motivation and the employees have in reference to the communication mediums.

The organizational culture’s values are the prime aspects that play part in the generation of a healthy an authoritative culture. The importance of having an authoritative organizational culture can be described as spontaneous and reinforced by social organizational practices (Schein, 2010). Based on research it is noted that organizational culture can generally account for about 20 up to 30 percent of the differentiated organizational performance contrarily to when equated with the organizations that operate as unremarkable in regard to culture (Schein, 2010). The culture of the military organizations is particularly customized and unique given that it is developed by several dynamic cultural and organizational change forces. The isolation of the organizational culture aspects that are connected to organizational change is an essential approach to the development of a differentiated culture which holds durable implications (Schein, 2010).

In reference to an excellent culture, all the military organizations are characterized by a mission statement that they attempt to achieve through change. In this context, all the cultural elements must be aligned with the proposed changes in achieving efficiency (Schein, 2010). The purpose plays part in designing the perception of the members and therefore this must be demonstrated authentically and displayed in a prominent manner in creating desirable perceptions that lead to long run commitment (Schein, 2010). The military sector falls under the non-profit based organizations and they often acquire excellence by having simplified and compelling statements that persuade the members to offer their contributions. On the other hand, the organization’s values are an integral part of the entire culture. This aspect must be accounted for at all times when proposing for change given that when change fails to be aligned with the developed values then efficiency can never be acquired (Schein, 2010).

While the mission or rather the vision communicates the purposes of the organizations, values are crucial in providing a set of procedural guidelines in reference to mindsets and behaviors that are necessary for the achievement of the set goals (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). For instance, the military organizations in the United States have set and implemented a set of effective values that are prominently passed to all the members. These values encompass the manner in which the organization vows to serve its target public, treat the members while upholding the expertise values. The values of these organization can best be demonstrated by the use of universal phrases which refers to serving all by delivering security to the public. But they are additionally contained in their ability to demonstrate innovativeness in different practices (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). While most organizations have established that their operational values are grounded amid several subjects such as members, expertise, consumers, environment and quality the origin of these values tends to hold less significance when equated to authenticity.

Norms refer to the standards or the customs within the organization. In short, these are the practices that are either deemed as acceptable or against the organization’s standards. It is obvious that organizational values hold little or no significance unless they are preserved within the practices of the organization (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). What the corporation promotes it what it should focus on. In that it asserts that individuals or the members are its prime assets then the organization should be ready particularly to invest in the invisible individual’s approaches. For instance, for most military organizations their value is held in the attempt to guard, serve and provide promising respect to their respective organizations. This follows thoroughly through the entire practices of the organization (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). Given that these organizations values tall hierarchy systems it means that the members are not highly encouraged to engage in debates regarding operations or related subjects. Valuing either flat or tall hierarchy system should not discourage participation. Instead regardless of the system that the organization values the members from the diversified levels should be encouraged to participate in different discussions without worry or any incorporation of negative perception (Schneider, Ehrhart, & Macey, 2013). In that whatever is valued by the organization, it should then be supported in evaluative criteria and promotional guidelines that are incorporated into the operating daily operations practices in the organization.

There is not a single organization that can generate a comprehensible culture without the engagement of individuals who share the organization’s integral values or the general readiness and competence to accept and adopt the standards (Tierney, 2008). This is the reason why the most authoritative organizations in the global context are characterized by the most constraining and strict policies for recruitment. This fits well with the military organizations which operate under rather strict guidelines in relation to conduct and operations.  This results in success given that their role is characterized by much complexity and therefore the guidelines help in controlling behaviors as well creating efficiency (Tierney, 2008). The best military organizations are dedicated to selecting members who are not only talented with the necessary military skills but also those that are suited best in fitting to their respective organizational culture. Their selection strategies are not just based on analyzing their skills but assess the fitness with the culture (Tierney, 2008). The military organizations are particularly significant given that the set values and practices must be adhered to in the creation of efficiency. Selecting individuals who are suited for a given culture besides having the necessary skills is essential in facilitating the capability to achieve the set mission (Du, 2006). In that, individuals often stick with the specific cultures that they fit, like and prefer to adhere to.  Therefore generating the most appropriate individual as the cultural carriers is essential in offering support to the culture that the organization holds. All the military organizations are associated with a unique and differentiating culture under a certain narrative that should be developed at all period in enhancing future developments for the organization (Du, 2006). The capability to uncover the capabilities and create a positive surrounding is core in the creation of a positive based culture. The aspects of this culture are most formal as they seek to create efficiency by fulfilling the stated organizational success. For instance, the military organizations dedicate most of their enormous acquisitions in celebrating their achievements and history in general. On the other hand, it also holds an informal cultural promotion that seeks to convince the members based on the achievements created by the founders and those that were there previously. This helps in the generation of an aesthetically organizational operative culture (Du, 2006). These values and beliefs are authoritative particularly when they are established, modified and redesigned to fit in the continuous transformation of the organizational culture.

The climate and the place should be favorable in facilitating performance. In that for most organizations efficiency is best acquired after opening and designing a surrounding where the members of the organizations have the opportunity to interact informally and exchange thoughts or ideologies (Tierney, 2008). This results in the exchange of values and the promotion of the required standards within the organization. The climate should be a favorable one because climate and location are the main cultural shaper. The creation of an open surrounding is essential not only in promoting interactions but also in promoting certain beneficial behaviors such as communication and increased collaboration. Certain locations might possess some cultures that either constrain or promotes the culture that the organization attempts to build. In this context, the organization should mainly focus on the building of a favorable working climate rather than controlling behaviors (Tierney, 2008). In that climate directly affects behaviors as well as values held by individuals in the organization.

Cultural climate really matters as it determines the responses of members to their given roles which affect the competitive edge of an organization. The organizational culture can be categorized as the most important strategic aspect that should be designed appropriately (Knight, 2014). The extent to which organizational change is necessitated in most organizations incorporates cultural changes. There is a necessity for creating cultural climate alignment with change. Culture in the military organizations controls the general expression of the organization. The climate should be an incorporating one where the employees hold a positive perception in regard to change in regard to the existing operations (Knight, 2014). In that, the perception of employees in regard to matters such as communication, roles, and interaction might affect the effectiveness of organizational change. If the employees feel that the organization values formal communication and fails to consider their ideologies when deciding about certain subjects is bound to create resistance which might generate even wider issues to the organization (Knight, 2014).

Culture is vitally essential to the success of any military organization. This is based on the 80 percent of the responses acquired from the 2013 participants (Kratschmer, 2013). The research additionally suggests a strong connection amid the general efficiency of different strategic change initiatives and the extent to which the processes have been leveraged by the change. In acquiring effectiveness in the implementation of strategic change in an organized military organizations are highly required to adopt a culture that is focused on accommodating changes. Culture is normally faced by a number of issues some of which are incorporated within the dynamic nature of the structures (Kratschmer, 2013). The complexity and rapid innovative dynamics in the global context have increased the pace of organizational change. In particular as the world attempt to fight the increasing security threats which have been promoted by technological advancement an accommodating an authoritative culture in the military sector is necessary.

These organizations must, therefore, create a climate that accommodates high morale, positive perceptions, willingness to participate and motivation. In general, these are attributes that denote an organizational setting that is highly open and willing to embrace change (Kratschmer, 2013). This includes both in the adaptation to the growing technology and transforming the manner in which operations are carried out. Where the particular attitudes live in regard to the implementation of specific transformations depends on how the member’s roles and operations will be impacted. The perception of employees in regard to the proposed change is directly linked to the perception in regard to their employer as well as organizational changes (Kratschmer, 2013). Most of the members who embrace change agree that the change is bound to generate wellness and that the climatic condition in the organization is favorable in promoting and accommodating the change. Based on the perception of the members on the capability of the organizations to handle change it is thus apparent that members that resist change are usually less motivated and demonstrate low participation as compared to those that embrace change (Kratschmer, 2013).

An organization that owns the most effective strategy globally but an inflexible culture that will not permit it to implement the strategic change cannot be categorized as effective. Culture is the major determinant of success given that it offers directions via which efficiency is to be achieved (Lim, Wang & Oo, 2016). Culture incorporates the collection of standards and principles that outline behavioral standards, guides and dictate how operations should be accomplished. An organization with the most appropriate culture is the one that is driven by individual’s relationships and their contribution rather than performance and achievements.  Developing more strategic relations helps in instilling a sense of motivation on the members which influence their performance and the general capability to achieve by the corporation. In this context, the culture should accommodate both internal and external concentration on what should be acquired with change. This should not exclude the expectations and concerns of the followers.

The strongest culture is the one that is characterized by a well-structured, steady and elastic climate that not only accommodates flexibility but also allows the members to pursue self-actualization (Knight, 2014). Cultural climate communicates so much about an organization. In that this entails the content that the leaders promote, the behaviors that the climate supports, whether the climate encourages of constraints the occurrence of conflicts and the associated communication. These features are crucial in establishing whether an organization is open to the occurrence of change (Lim, Wang & Oo, 2016). In reference to organizational culture, the climactic setting is something that can never be understated. This is because if there is no consistency amid the proposed change and the existing cultural climate this implies that the mission accomplishment might not be possible which results in the development of inefficiency and lack of effectiveness (Knight, 2014).

Conclusion

The changing pace in most organizations and particularly for the military is not likely to slow in a drastic nature in the coming years.  Based on the benefits that are linked to effective change handling, there is a high probability that effectiveness in the management of both organizational culture and change will provide these organizations with sustainable competitive edges. It is apparent that the effectiveness of organizational change depends more on the culture of the organization. Organizational culture in the military organizations is limited by the focus on formal communications and strict operating guidelines that hinder the capability of the organization to achieve the stated mission with fewer constraints. While the communication aspects in the organizations have improved due to technological advancement which has in turn impacted change management, the individual’s side is categorized as challenging one. Organizations fail to align organizational change needs with the general needs of the culture which results in inefficiency. Military members are highly uncomfortable with the values and the set standards of the organization that tends to demand more productivity. When the members are highly uncomfortable with the developed measures they are likely to become doubting in regard to the company’s capability to generate efficiency and the effect of the respective change on the general operation of the organization. The primary organizational components are resources, leadership, communication, goals and organizational structure or the hierarchy system. On the other hand, the organizational culture aspects that relate to organizational change are rites and rituals, organizational norms, values, and climate. These factors depend on communication in delivering their roles and therefore without an appropriate communication system, it becomes challenging to acquire operational effectiveness. The achievement of the organizational change mission is mainly facilitated by the resources availability, the existing leadership, communication and the structural nature of the organization which either promotes ease or constraints in accepting changes by eliminating or creating members resistance.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Andriopoulos, C., & Dawson, P. (2008). Managing change, creativity and innovation. Sage Publication Ltd.

Bissell, Gavin. & Dolan, Peter. (2011). Organizational Behavior for Social Work. Policy Pr.

Burton, R. M., & Obel, B. (2004). Strategic organizational diagnosis and design: The dynamics of fit.

Cameron, E., & Green, M. (2012). Making sense of change management: A complete guide to the models, tools and techniques of organizational change. London: Kogan Page.

Cameron, K. S., & Quinn, R. E. (2011). Diagnosing and changing organizational culture: Based on the competing values framework. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cooperrider, D., & Srivastva, S. (2017). Appreciative Inquiry in Organizational Life. In Research in organizational change and development (pp. 81-142). Emerald Publishing Limited.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2009). Organization development & change. Australia: South-Western/Cengage Learning.

Dievernich, F. E. P., Tokarski, K. O., & Gong, J. (2014). Change management and the human factor: Advances, challenges and contradictions in organizational development.

Driskill, G. W., & Brenton, A. L. (2011). Organizational culture in action: A cultural analysis workbook. Thousand Oaks, Calif: SAGE.

Du, P. M. (2006). The impact of organizational culture on knowledge management. Oxford: Chandos.

Finch, E. (2011). Facilities Change Management. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.

Goksoy, A. (2016). Organizational change management strategies in modern business. Hershey.

Hornstein, H. A. (2015). The integration of project management and organizational change management is now a necessity. International Journal of Project Management, 33(2), 291-298.

Knight, R. L. (2014). Organisational culture, change readiness and retention: a human services perspective (Doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology).

Kratschmer, P. (2013). Organisational culture is highly resistant to change - discuss. Place of publication not identified: Grin Verlag.

Lewis, L. K. (2011). Organizational change: Creating change through strategic communication. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K: Wiley-Blackwell.

Lim, B. T., Wang, Z., & Oo, B. L. (2016). Change management for sustainable competitive advantages: the roles of organisational culture and employees in the Chinese construction firms. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban Development, 7(3-4), 230-236.

Mattiske, C. (2011). Managing organizational change: Tools to help your team through change. Sydney Publication.

Miller, K. (2014). Organizational Communication. Stamford, CT: Cengage Learning.

Myers, P., Hulks, S., & Wiggins, L. (2012). Organizational change: Perspectives on theory and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Promes, M. (2016). Change management and organizational learning in a new working environment: A longitudinal and mixed methods research design.Verlag.

Ramanathan, T. R. (2009). The role of organisational change management in offshore outsourcing of information technology services: Qualitative case studies from a multinational pharmaceutical company. Boca Raton, Fla: Dissertation.com.

Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schneider, B., Ehrhart, M. G., & Macey, W. H. (2013). Organizational climate and culture. Annual review of psychology, 64, 361-388.

Tierney, W. G. (2008). The impact of culture on organizational decision-making: Theory and practice in higher education. Stylus Pub.